EPYC 9274F vs Xeon E7520
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 85 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 13.74 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | no data | 5.57 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | no data | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| Release date | 1 January 2010 (16 years ago) | 10 November 2022 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $3,060 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Xeon E7520 and EPYC 9274F: number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 1.87 GHz | 4.05 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.87 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 40.5 |
| L1 cache | no data | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 18 MB L3 Cache | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm |
| Die size | no data | 8x 72 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 70 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 52,560 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E7520 and EPYC 9274F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 2 |
| Socket | FCLGA1567 | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 320 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E7520 and EPYC 9274F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Xeon E7520 and EPYC 9274F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E7520 and EPYC 9274F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E7520 and EPYC 9274F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 6 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 460.8 GB/s |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E7520 and EPYC 9274F.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 January 2010 | 10 November 2022 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 24 |
| Threads | 8 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 320 Watt |
Xeon E7520 has 237% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9274F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 12 years, 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 800% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Intel Xeon E7520 and AMD EPYC 9274F. We've got no test results to judge.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
